Re: [PATCH 02/18] xstat: Add a pair of system calls to makeextended file stats available [ver #6]

[Trond Myklebust]

On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 19:03 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Thursday 2010-07-22 18:40, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> >On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Jeremy Allison <jra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 08:47:46AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >>> Tell me why we shouldn't just do this right?
> >>
> >> No, ctime isn't the same as Windows "create time".
> >
> >Umm. What kind of reading problems do you guys have?
> >
> >I know effin well that ctime isn't the same as Windows create time.
> >THAT WAS MY POINT.
> >
> >But the fact is, th Unix ctime semantics are insane and largely
> >useless. There's a damn good reason almost nobody uses ctime under
> >unix.
> 
> I beg to differ. ctime is not completely useless. It reflects changes on 
> the inode for when you don't you change the content. It's like an mtime 
> for the metadata. It comes useful when you go around in your filesystem 
> trying to figure out who of your co-admins screwed up the permissions on 
> /etc/passwd... and if the mtime is the same as that of the last backup, 
> I can at least have a reasonable assurance that it was /only/ the 
> metadata that was tampered with. (SHA1 check, yeah yeah, costly on large 
> files.)

Errr... Only if you eliminate utimes() from your syscall table.
Otherwise it is trivial to reset the mtime after changing the file
contents.

Cheers
  Trond

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/